Here's what I suggest:
1) Opening up the cases from 1993-1995 is probably of little merit. Few
people still have the context for those templates to be useful, and the
operating system has changed *alot* since then.
2) Instead, start an umbrella case for you architecture. In your
umbrella case, you can identify any high level issues that you have
noticed. If your new architecture is conformant to a certain ABI, you
should include information about the ABI (perhaps pointers to
documentation, and note any exceptions)
3) As individual problems or concerns crop up, you can then file
additional cases (fast tracks, whatever) when you need to make changes
to common code, or changes that might affect users of your platform.
Quite honestly, I don't think any of the ARC members are going to spend
vast amounts of time poring over every detail of the ABI, your cache
architecture, memory organization, etc. You should describe the parts
that people need to know about to be able to use the platform, but you
probably don't need to go into *too* much detail.
I'll even go one further. While I've not been an ARC member at the time
any platform was introduced, I'm willing to help out. If you want to
have a conference call to talk about (at a high level) what you need,
I'll try to guide you. I'll even act as your sponsor at ARC. If there
are questions that can be specifically answered by looking at old ARC
cases, then I can do that too. (Although I don't want to recommend
using them as a template.)
- Garrett
Roland Mainz wrote:
> Darren J Moffat wrote:
>
>> James Carlson wrote:
>>
>>>> We need this materials as template for a set of ARC casess to specify
>>>> support for a new architecture/hardware platform...
>>>>
>>> I'll look over those as time allows, but my guess would be that it's
>>> unlikely to be useful material for a new architecture. You're much
>>> better off just writing a straightforward case that describes the new
>>> ABI and the relevant issues, and going in for an inception review.
>>>
>>> I think you're looking at a time-waster.
>>>
>> Wouldn't the AMD64 cases be more appropriate anyway since they are more
>> recent.
>>
>
> No, since they are too familar with an existing architecture. That's why
> I was asking explicitly for the PowerPC ARC cases...
>
> ----
>
> Bye,
> Roland
>
>
